The entire state of Western Australia could be heading back to the polls in what could prove an early test of the Abbott government's popularity after more than 1300 votes went missing during a recount of WA Senate ballots.

In what would be an unprecedented move, the High Court could order a fresh vote for the six WA Senate spots, giving the state's voters the chance to alter the balance of power in the upper house.

Mick Keelty, former commissioner of the Australian Federal Police, will head an inquiry into the missing WA Senate votes. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

Special Minister of State Michael Ronaldson lashed the Australian Electoral Commission after it revealed it had misplaced 1375 ballot papers, which had been verified during the initial count but could not be located for the recount.

Advertisement

"I have personally expressed to the electoral commissioner my strong view that this situation is totally unsatisfactory and that I, as the responsible minister, view this matter very dimly," Senator Ronaldson said.

Former Australian Federal Police commissioner Mick Keelty has been called in to conduct an independent inquiry.

Special Minister of State Michael Ronaldson said it is ''totally unsatisfactory" for votes to have gone missing. Photo: Penny Bradfield

Electoral commissioner Ed Killesteyn apologised for the missing papers, which he said could not be found despite "exhaustive efforts" to locate them.

The votes were classified as 1255 formal above-the-line ballots and 120 informal votes from the divisions of Pearce and Forrest.

The WA recount began on October 17, after an appeal by the Greens and the Australian Sports Party over the initial result, which hinged on a margin of just 14 votes at one crucial stage of the count.

In the first vote, Greens senator Scott Ludlam and the Sports Party's Wayne Dropulich lost out to Palmer United Party's Zhenya "Dio" Wang and Labor's Louise Pratt, who took the fifth and sixth Senate spots.

Senator Ludlam said the result should not be declared until the votes were found or while Mr Keelty was investigating.

Senator Pratt said she was "deeply disappointed" by the development, which she said was "not only gravely concerning for me as a candidate, but also for all other candidates and the people of Western Australia".

Party leader Clive Palmer, who stridently opposed the recount, called for the original result to be restored. "Is the AEC trying to rig the election? Are they committing a fraud? Or are they just completely incompetent?" he said.

ABC election analyst Antony Green suggested on Thursday that WA voters could be headed back to the polls for Australia's first Senate by-election.

He said the missing votes were almost certainly down to an administrative error but noted that another Senate vote would be an ''acute embarrassment" for the AEC.

"It's entirely possible that the vote would have been the same [with the missing votes included] but the problem is the the ballot papers cannot be verified," Mr Green said.

The AEC says it will shortly declare a result for the WA recount, but added it would "strongly consider whether any petition to the Court of Disputed Returns is necessary".

In happier news for the mining magnate on Thursday, Mr Palmer was declared winner of the Queensland lower house seat of Fairfax.

Mr Palmer – who has repeatedly accused the AEC of trying to rig the result – triumphed after a four-week recount gave him a final 53-vote lead over Liberal National Party rival Ted O'Brien.

Mr Palmer's initial seven-vote lead triggered an automatic recount, but the process dragged on after scrutineers, mostly from Mr Palmer's team, challenged the validity of tens of thousands of ballot papers.

The AEC will shortly declare a result for the WA recount, after which any candidate or WA voter or even the AEC itself would have 40 days to petition the High Court, sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns, for a fresh election.

With the new senators not due to start their terms until July 2014, a fresh vote could take place as late as May.

210 comments

Not good enough. Let's have a new election...........

Commenter

Johnny

Location

Perth

Date and time

October 31, 2013, 1:23PM

Yep demand a new election. This is worse than we had it.. report after report.. day after day. Riots, protests. People are not happy.

Commenter

The Other Guy1

Date and time

October 31, 2013, 1:32PM

Not good enough as well. Let's have another election

Commenter

Peter

Location

SYDNEY

Date and time

October 31, 2013, 1:43PM

Its not across the board. You''ll get your election in 3 years time.

Commenter

Act Rationally

Date and time

October 31, 2013, 1:57PM

Why was there a recount in the first place when there has never been a senate recount in history? Looks like there are some green supporters in AEC, would AEC done such a expensive recount if there was some other party involved.

Commenter

Regh

Date and time

October 31, 2013, 2:06PM

A new election would be cheaper and quicker than an inquiry, The Other Guy1 is right i have seen the riots and protests on my non-foxtel tv.

Makes one wonder about all the other electorates and other missing votes......There is clearly votes that are known and votes that are unknown and votes that are known unknown.

Commenter

stoney

Date and time

October 31, 2013, 2:08PM

Clearly the Greens were unhappy losing out but why should the taxpayers have to foot a bill with another election so close to the last one? I hope some sense prevails here. The current vote should stand - those 1255 could have gone either way without making much of a difference to the overall tally.

Commenter

Voter

Location

Perth

Date and time

October 31, 2013, 2:29PM

So who benefits from the box of "missing" votes?? They should be the first person investigated.

Commenter

Scotty_16

Date and time

October 31, 2013, 2:29PM

..what was it Clive Palmer said about the AEC.. "Mr Palmer last week repeated his claim that there was evidence of voter fraud in the electorate, raising questions about why the AEC does not require voters to supply identification and why pencils are used to mark the ballots."

+1

Commenter

George

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

October 31, 2013, 2:33PM

@Regh - good on ya - trying to spin this as a Green's conspiracy.

They decided to recount due to the extremely close nature of the context (14 votes at one bottleneck); given that recounts automatically happen for lower house seats in outcomes on 100 or less votes (and overall these have a much lower amount of votes in total then senate contests!) it hardly seems to be a controversial decision. Especially give the complexity of senate voting sheets.

But you keep waving you party's flag and screaming about green conspiracies.